Jump to content
  • Announcements

    Welcome! New around here? Take a look at the New Members' Guide for some pointers.

    You can Sign up or log in with your Facebook account and you can soon be chatting away with friends old and new..

    Check out our Handy Information section if you're after something quickly!

  • calender payment

    Calendar Paymene

    Delivery Options
    Your NBN Forum Username:

  • If you would like to support the forum, please consider visiting the forum shop, where you can purchase such items as NBN Burgees, Window Stickers, or even a custom Limited Edition Wooden Throttle Control Knob

    Forum Shop

JennyMorgan

Time To Comment!

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

I don't fill in forms unles I know what's going on! What's it all about Peter?

national parks, areas of outstanding beauty etc. It's all in the accompanying blurb.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry and all that Peter, but there is no blurb!! It's straight into Name? and e-mail address?. Perhaps the link doesn't take me where you thought it would.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without a bone fida name and e-mail an online survey could not be considered valid. I shall certainly complete the survey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure it is bone fida (though scams do look genuine these days) but who is asking what and on who's behalf? what caused the survey in the first place? What will the results be used for? and a few other questions.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole National Park "Thing" is up for and under review.

But with the political turmoil? Who knows?  I have been told this review was very much a Gove inititive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I had a look at the the various questions and to be honest I could not see point of many of the questions, ideally one of the questions should have been about what National Parks you had visited or if you lived in a National Park area your perceptions and limitations.

Regards

Alan

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the Broads Authority's response:

http://www.broads-authority.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/1408260/National-Parks-Review-ba231118.pdf?fbclid=IwAR3DypJHXujr1HkNeXeKwU_3iJyuCxr7JsYdZ8VLBUlK7MabnnJvIj3r1fQ

Unacceptable expansionism.

To lose the Harbour Authority requirements would mean the loss of the Authority's third requirement, the one that stands in the way of the Sandford Principle thus opening the door to being a national park proper and us good folk losing the protection that we have in regard to navigation. A well worded and crafty move by Dr Packman but the devil is in the detail, between the lines so to speak.. If this 'wish list' were to go ahead we would lose the rights to navigate freely as we do today.  A dangerous document.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's quite funny how different people can read the same document and see different things. Regarding the 'right of navigation', I thought it was pretty clear that Dr. Packman was talking about 'commercial cargoes' navigating to the 'Port of Norwich'. Which, as we all know, no longer exists. Having responsibility for something that no longer exists, seems a little pointless, to me. He goes on to mention, that as the waterways are now used predominantly for 'recreational boating', perhaps this should be given greater prominence.

I also understand the document as saying, it would be helpful if silt were not labelled as a waste product. Which would make it easier for the Broads Authority to dredge the navigation and dispose of the resulting silt.

I don't think either of these 'wishes' weaken the Authorities responsibility for navigation, in fact they might even assist in that protection, if those responsibilities are targeted at the needs of 'recreational boating' and not non-existent commercial traffic. We often hear calls for 'more dredging to be done' on these forum pages, I would have thought easing the ability to dredge the navigation, would have been welcomed...

Perhaps, I'm not 'reading between the lines' properly, but regarding navigation, it sound quite reasonable to me. Maybe, someone could point out, what it is that I'm missing...

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was shown the original draft of the document that went round BA HQ for internal comment, I can't post it here as I was sent it in confidence. However you really do need to read that previous draft to get the full drift. The BA clearly wants to stop being a harbour authority, to abolish the third responsibility in the Broads Acts and deal with navigation under conservation. Simple; THEN they can be a proper National Park. Should have seen it coming really. I really don't think that JP ever actually wanted to run the navigation anyway!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re the navigation to Norwich, it may not be used by coasters and the like but it still exists and it would take an act of Parliament to close it. Remember that the Lowestoft to Norwich Navigation is what keeps the railway bridges from being permanently closed. JP is talking about navigating as opposed to navigation, the navigation being where we can navigate. He's not saying that we can't navigate, just that he wants to lose the legal requirement to maintain the existing navigation. Why else would he wish to abandon the third requirement in the Broads Act? Why else would he want to abandon the legal requirement to maintain our navigable waters?  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see what you are saying JM but your point is a subjective notion of what isn't written in the response and as such can't be qualified. Maybe in the future if what you are saying can be substantiated then you can say 'I told you so' :default_unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kingfisher666 said:

Perhaps, I'm not 'reading between the lines' properly, but regarding navigation, it sound quite reasonable to me. Maybe, someone could point out, what it is that I'm missing...

 

It is confusing isn't it? But all you have to do is assume everything the BA says is a lie, and then everything becomes clear.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, batrabill said:

It is confusing isn't it? But all you have to do is assume everything the BA says is a lie, and then everything becomes clear.

We all love a good conspiracy theory, but when you've heard it so many times it becomes like white noise, it's there but you don't really hear it... :10_wink:

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kingfisher666 said:

Perhaps, I'm not 'reading between the lines' properly, but regarding navigation, it sound quite reasonable to me. Maybe, someone could point out, what it is that I'm missing...

Peter is totally correct to express his fears about this. But it goes very much further than that!

The river between Norwich and Yarmouth, also Lowestoft, is indeed a Maritime Navigation and I suppose one could argue that it has fallen into dis-use ever since the planning authorities allowed the building of the Southern Bypass bridge at Postwick, which effectively closed Norwich as a port. But the BA cannot just close it as "dis-used" as that would require an act of Parliament. It seems to me obvious that the BA would love to remove its status as a navigation and then it could allow the railway swing bridges on the Yare and Waveney to "fall into dis-use" as well. By the way, I didn't know that BA was the Harbour Authority. I thought that was Peel Ports?

But let us not confuse this!

A Maritime Navigation is not the same thing as a Norfolk Broads Navigation. The navigable waterways of the Broads are also commercial and were created right back in the 18th century and earlier in order to provide transport and trade. In the Broads area it was the only way to get about in those days. This is why - in Law - a navigation on the Broads is a waterway leading to a public or parish staithe. It is this ancient right which we must maintain and this is why I keep banging on about the importance of staithes. At the moment, the BA must maintain a "navigation" which is a waterway leading to a staithe.

This is why you can still cruise to such places as Rockland, Loddon or Womack water, as they are all navigations leading to a staithe.

Imagine if this were not the case

Beccles to Geldeston might be the first to close as I don't know if there is actually a staithe there. Wayford bridge to Dilham? Malthouse Broad? It is pretty certain that navigation would be closed anywhere north of Potter bridge due to all the other pressure groups in that area, who pretty well own the place anyway! How about the Bure, from Wroxham bridge up to Coltishall? There are hardly any commercial boatyards left up there since the closure of Porter and Haylett, apart from a few day boats, but it is one of the most beautiful cruises on the north rivers.

So what will we be left with, in terms of the right of "navigation"? What does "pleasure boating" mean, in the eyes of the Broads Authority, and within the terms of a National Park?

Or will "navigation" simply be excused by the right of access by canoe or paddle board?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Dr Packman’s report, as regards the navigation, this is what he has to say:

Comment: The Broads Authority is a navigation and harbour authority with responsibility for maintaining and improving the waterways under Section 10 of the Broads Act. Its third purpose is to manage the Broads for the purpose of ‘protecting the interests of navigation'. This purpose was considered essential and appropriate in an era now long gone when coasters brought their commercial cargoes up into Norwich, but the city is no longer a port and now the primary use of the waterways is recreational boating. This could be seen as falling primarily under the second purpose and it may be appropriate to review the wording of the purposes and consider whether the duty to maintain the navigation area should be given greater prominence.

For consideration: Whether to review the Authority's responsibilities in relation to the recreational use of the waterways, protecting the interests of navigation and maintaining the navigation area in a way so the wording of the purposes better serves the modern use of the waterways and interests of all those with a stake in the Broads.”

In my opinion, the section I have emboldened is an outright lie. Let me explain.

Going back to early Victorian days, there was little recreational boating. Commercial use was made of wherries, to collect and distribute goods around the Broads. With the coming of the railway, leisure usage increased and, with the improvement of the roads and the coming of the motor lorry in the early 20th century, the wherry became redundant. Thereafter, the principal use of the navigation was for leisure purposes. The seagoing freight vessels that went into Norwich petered out in the 1980s and the erection of the Postwick Viaduct on the A.47 (completed in 1992) tolled the death-knell of Norwich as a working port.

The Norfolk & Suffolk Broads Act was passed in 1988, so the legislators were very well aware of the uses to which the navigation was put at that time, which were principally for leisure, not commercial purposes. If the main consideration at that time was the protection of the commercial boat traffic into Norwich, that was well-catered for by Section 10(6) of the 1988 Act, “In discharging its functions in relation to the Norwich navigation the Authority shall have particular regard to the interests of seagoing freight vessels.”

 No seagoing freight vessels ever got under the Gt Yarmouth railway bridge to access the Northern Rivers. So why did the legislators consider it to be so important that the interests of navigation should be so strongly protected that they insisted it should be one of the prime functions of the Authority, taking equal precedence with the other two prime functions? I can think of two reasons, both of which are as valid today as they were in 1988.

1. There is a right of navigation on the tidal stretches of the Broads rivers, and, I suggest, a right of navigation on the remainder of the navigation, through historic and unopposed use.

2. The leisure industry was the life-blood of the Broads, giving pleasure to thousands, employment to hundreds (if not thousands) and providing a substantial proportion the revenue of the Authority.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, Paladin, wise and substantiated words, as usual.

I keep asking myself, what does the Authority gain by distancing itself from its duties as a harbour authority? Why should they wish to that, what would they gain, why remove that third purpose for which they exist? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Further to paladin`s words of wisdom,a question regarding the hire boat industry. Are hire boats classed as private or commercial craft for the purposes of navigation ?

Paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You try cruising up towards Honing these days!!

The son is proving even more obdurate than the father and instead of wasting  time worrying about what might be, perhaps we should be more concerned about what is actually happening! The trouble is no one will actually confront these people and as a result they actually get away with it, and then its too late!! (To be fair that is beyond the BA's remit!! )

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul - they belong to a commercial enterprise but that's probably the nearest they get to a commercial vessel!

Not only the bridges mentioned affected, but Trowse Bridge will never again open freely - unless its attended by many NR personnel and its around 2 a.m. in the morning!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, scaniaman said:

Further to paladin`s words of wisdom,a question regarding the hire boat industry. Are hire boats classed as private or commercial craft for the purposes of navigation ?

Paul

From the interpretation section of the 1988 Act, section 25(1):

“commercial vessel” means any vessel which is not a pleasure vessel;

“pleasure craft” means any vessel used for sport or recreation, whether hired or privately owned, and includes a houseboat.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

During the second reading of the 1988 Bill, the minister Mr Waldegrave said, “The waterways of the Broads attract many thousands of visitors from all over Britain and abroad. There are now more than 12,000 hire and private boats on the Broads and over 250,000 people visit or holiday in the area each year.”

And later in his speech he said, “In particular, we have looked closely at the navigation provisions…We have worked hard to ensure that there are proper safeguards for seagoing freight shipping on what we have described as the Norwich navigation—that is, the rivers Yare and Wensum up to the port of Norwich—which is still important for commercial cargo vessels.” (Source: Hansard)

So for John Packman to seek to mislead the Authority in such a blatant fashion is disgraceful. Parliament was very, very well aware of the importance of leisure boating.

 

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • NBN Mobile App

    Want to use NBN when you're out and about?

    Get our mobile app for Android and iOS!

    Get it on Google Play

×

Important Information

For details of our Guidelines, please take a look at the Terms of Use here.